Sadhna Textile Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT

188 ITR 318High Court1991#13650 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Judgments citing Sadhna Textile Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT

Trilok Parumal Motiani, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the first question must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue

ITA 4542/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Gagan Goyaltrilok Parumal Motiani, 213/214, Kalyandas Udyog Bhavan, Near Century Bazar, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aahpm3289N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-21(3)(4), 206, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400012 ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. M. Subramanian Respondent By : Sh. Purnesh Gururani, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2023 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-48, Mumbai (For Short ‘Cit(A)’) Dated 30.04.2019 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Sh. M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Sh. Purnesh Gururani, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 48

…be made. Subsequent adjustment of the account made on the very last day of the accounting year will not alter the position that the assessee had received notional dividends on the various dates when she withdrew the aforesaid amounts from the company. [1991] 188 ITR 318 (Bom.) Sadhana Textiles Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income tax H' was the assessee's subsidiary company. During relevant accounting year 'H' was a creditor of the assessee in amounts larger than the amount of the accumulated profits. The ITO, therefore, treated the accumulated profits as dividend in the assessee's hands under section 2(22)…

Mandava Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 313/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1702/Hyd/2018 (AY: 2015-16) M/s. Mandava Holdings Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward-16(2), Hyderabad – 500 034. Hyderabad. PAN: AAFCM 4964 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri A.V. Raghuram Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of hearing: 18/02/2021 Date of pronouncement: 25/02/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: Both these appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the Ld. CIT (A)-4, Hyderabad in…

Mandava Holdings Private Limtied, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 1702/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)

M/S G G Oils & Fats Pvt.Ltd, Bathinda vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 508/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 508/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora &For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 2(18)Section 2(22)(e)Section 56

…se. 30 G. G. Oils & Fats Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.8 It may also be clarified that the provision is attracted irrespective of the status of the shareholder. That is, is applicable to a share-holder, as explained in Sadhana Textile Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 188 ITR 318 (Bom), to a corporate shareholder, as the assesse-company. We consider it pertinent to clarify this as it is stated that the provision is not applicable to an Inter Corporate Deposit (ICD), i.e., a deposit, by definition, by one company to another. It is in fact nobody’s case that the running account between the two entities constitutes an ICD(s)…

Microfinish Valves Pvt Ltd, Hubli vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hubli

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1706/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 2(22)(e)

…tement of accounts, M/s Microfinish Pumps Pvt Ltd., has sufficient reserves and surplus as on 31/03/2012. The provisions of section 2(22)(e) are applicable also to the advance or loan made to a corporate entity - Sadhana Textiles Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1991) 188 ITR 318 (Born.). 10. In view of the above facts and discussion, it is confirmed that the Company. M/s Microfinish Pumps Pvt. Ltd (wherein the directors of the assessee Company have substantial interest i.e. shareholding exceeding 20%) having sufficient 'accumulated profits' as on dates of advances of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- made to the assessee-Company (wherei…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Grandeur Wear Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 874/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. Sahadevan, IRS, JCIT

Section 2(22)(e)

…of K.M.S. Lakshmana Aiyar vs. Addl. ITO (1960) 40 ITR 469, that of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Tarulata Shyam and others vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 485, and that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sadhana Textiles Mills Pvt Ltd vs. CIT 188 ITR 318, he held that Section 2(22) (e) of the Act took within its fold not only an individual but also a corporate entity. He made an addition of "1,19,30,943/-. 3. Aggrieved, assessee moved in appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Grounds taken by the ITA No.874/Mds/2017. :- 5 -: assessee before the ld. Commissioner of Income…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sindhu Holdings Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2766/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor & Sanat Kapoor, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri B.R.R. Kumar, Senior DR

Section 143Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…nds of the assessee and in this regard, he made reference to the various judicial pronouncements relied upon by the AO, which are reproduced below :- (i) Kantilal Manilal vs. CIT – (1961) 41 ITR 275 (SC); (ii) Sadhana Textiles Mills (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT – (1991) 188 ITR 318 (Bom.); (iii) Smt. Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT – (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC); (iv) CIT vs. Mukundray K. Shah – 160 Taxman 276 (SC) (v) Miss P. Sarada vs. CIT – 96 Taxman 11 (SC) (vi) Kantilal Manilal vs. CIT – 41 ITR 275 (SC) 8 ITA No.2766/Del./2012 (vii) CIT vs. P.K. Abubucker – 135 Taxman 77 (Mad.) (viii) Mr. Ravindra D. Amin vs. CIT – 208 ITR 815 (Gu…